15Precious
in the eyes of the Lord [is] the death of His loved ones. 16Indeed,
O Lord, because I am Your servant, I am Your servant, the son of
Your handmaid. You have loosed my bonds.
I have brought along verse 15 above because I think the
thought is connected, which I will explain later. First of all, I have to
confess that verse 16 is very difficult to translate, at least for me. It
begins with a particle “anah” which apparently everyone else is inclined to
translate “truly” or “indeed” or something like that. I don’t know enough to say
for sure what to do with it. I suspect it is just a particle of exclamation,
but one particularly applicable when in the presence of a superior. There is a
similar particle, simply “nah,” which I have always understood was just a
Hebrew way of acknowledging authority. When someone commands us, in our culture
we may say, “Yes, sir” and then dip our head slightly. I understand the Hebrew
“nah” is a verbal way of expressing the same as our dip of the head. It appears
in Amy Grant’s song, “El Shaddai” when she sings (in Hebrew), “Erkhamka na,
Adonai.” “Erkahmka” means, “I love you,” and Adonai means “Master.” What is the
“na” in between? My understanding is it is that “dip” of the head, so to speak.
So, that is why I suspect “anah” is simply an exclamation of being in the
presence of one’s Superior. …but I’m not sure.
Also, there is a Hebrew “kiy” in the middle which I have
translated “because.” It doesn’t really make any sense there, but it is there,
so I just translated it in place. Not sure what else to do with it. Finally, it
is interesting that the word “handmaiden” appears to me to actually be the word
for “faithful.” The word is “amat” which one way or another looks like “emet,”
“truth” or “truthful” or “faithful.” The word “amah” is a “maidservant.” The
only difference is the “t” or the “h” at the end. Things turn murky because the
word also has the pronominal suffix “kah” on the end, which is the “Your” in
“Your handmaiden.” Apparently “amah” turns into “amat” when you add “kah,”
since the words are universally translated “Your handmaiden” (or something like
that) as opposed to “Your truthfulness.” I notice too that the Septuagint
translated it into the Greek word for “handmaiden.” That would be a fairly
strong case for it, that Jews living in 200 BC understood it as “handmaiden.”
But, once again, it is a little beyond me. I chose to translate it “handmaiden”
basically just because everyone else does (a dangerous habit, of course, but
perhaps justified in this case).
So we go with it as it is.
Here’s what I suspect is going on: In verse 15, the psalmist
refers to himself as one of the Lord’s “loved ones,” which of course is His
“hasadim,” His “special ones.” I think in verse 16, he is still dwelling on his
“special” status with the Lord, only it morphs over into the imagery of
slavery, which of course was ubiquitous in their culture. To them, it wasn’t
necessarily a bad thing. To be someone’s servant could be a very good thing,
especially if the master was a good man. To be a servant in a good man’s house
meant you had food to eat and your basic needs cared for. You were protected
from roaming marauders and basically lacked for nothing. This all feeds into
the reasoning why, in Exodus 21:5,6, the servant who should be freed in Jubilee
could actually choose to become a man’s servant for life.
The psalmist here, having reminded himself he is one of the
Lord’s “hasadim,” now also revels in the privilege of being a servant in the
Lord’s house. Twice he says, “I am Your servant,” and, once again, I have underlined
the “I” in my translation since it is actually expressed in the Hebrew. Again,
they didn’t need to articulate pronominal substantives. When they did it
appears usually to have been for emphasis, as in this case.
But it doesn’t stop there. He also declares that he is “the
son of Your maidservant.” It was one thing to be a servant in a good man’s
house. It was an even better thing to be born
a servant in that good man’s house. In their culture, the children born to a
servant girl automatically became the master’s servants as well. In their way
of thinking, this was a good thing as they knew they’d be cared for from birth
to death. There was a sense of a “special” status (hasadim!) for someone who
could say, “I was born the master’s servant!”
The unseen hero in this discussion is, of course, the
mother. It would seem undeniable that the psalmist is recalling that his mother
was a servant of the Lord before him and, because she was, he was, in a sense,
born the Lord’s servant too. Of course children have a choice whether to be the
Lord’s servant whether their mother was or not, but I doubt anyone anywhere
would deny the powerful influence of a mother’s faith. “The hand that rocks the
cradle rules the world.” I used to wonder in my mind how a godless, evil man
like Ahaz could possibly father a son like Hezekiah or how men like Manasseh
and Amon could be the progenitors of a Josiah. Then it occurred to me that one
explanation could be their mothers. As godless and evil and wicked as any
father is, a mother’s influence can still be the guiding star in a young
child’s heart.
This phrase, “the son of Your maidservant” also occurs in
Psalm 86:16. In that case, the psalmist is, in fact, David himself. I don’t
know for sure that David is the psalmist here in 116, since it doesn’t say,
but, after almost 35 years of studying the Bible, I have to say, everything in
this Psalm sure breathes of David’s style. At any rate, I think it interesting
to point out here that, in the Bible, nothing is ever said of David’s mother.
(There are at least a couple references to David’s “father and mother” but
nothing at all about her person). We know of him as “the son of Jesse” but we
know nothing of his mother. However, for sure it is David in Psalm 86 who
refers to her when he claims that special status, “the son of Your
maidservant.” Clearly, she was a woman of faith and that faith she imparted to
her young son David.
I suppose I’m rambling, but I personally think I sense a
mother’s influence in David’s life. What I mean is this: David was clearly a
man’s man. He was a fierce warrior, a very brave man (i.e., fighting bears,
lions, and giants!), and a strong leader. No doubt much of this he learned from
his father. But I can’t miss that there was also in David a tenderness of heart
and a sensitivity to God and people, which things I personally think savor of a
godly woman’s influence. Once again,
I am probably rambling, but I think that is the beauty of God’s design, that
ideally, a boy should grow up in a home with a father who teaches him to be a
man and a mother who tempers that manliness with the influences of her feminine
gentleness. To lack either too often renders an imbalance from which that young
man will never recover. To have both can and should, as in David’s case,
produce a man after God’s own heart – a man who can be both strong and gentle,
a man of both aggressive action and quiet faith.
I will ever be thankful for my own mother’s influence. It
has always been interesting to me that I have never “fit” very well in the man’s
world I have lived in. I remember even as a very young boy disliking “the way
men act.” What I was seeing was them guffawing and boasting, “strutting” their
stuff, being coarse and raunchy, and just plain mean-spirited. At the same
time, I have known men who could be strong and yet gentle too (my father being
one), and I admired them. I just never understood “what makes me different.”
Somewhere along the years I realized it was my mother’s presence and influence,
her imprint, her “early impress,” so to speak.
It is a matter of supreme thankfulness to claim the title, “son
of Your maidservant.” No one gets to choose wonderful parents, but we can
certainly recognize them and be thankful to the One who gave them to us!
The psalmist’s last statement, “You have freed me from my
chains” is worth an entire blog of its own; but suffice it to say here that I’m
not so sure his mind has left his “slavery” illustration. I understand that, in
the ancient culture, a man could buy a prisoner who then became his servant.
Prisoners were often either publically executed (for the amusement of the
general populace) or subjected to horrific labor which would soon kill them. To
be purchased by a good man once again meant at least you would be cared for and
could go on living some reasonably acceptable lifestyle. Obviously the same is
true of us. It is freedom itself to be purchased by the blood of Jesus and made
a servant in the household of the Lord. “My chains are gone! I’ve been set
free! My God, my Savior has ransomed me. And like a flood, His mercy rains,
unending love, amazing grace!”
“O Lord, truly I am Your servant;
I am Your servant, the son of
Your maidservant;
You have freed me from my
chains!”
No comments:
Post a Comment